At what figure do YOU think the average house price will hit rock bottom ?

Graham_Devon

You can kind of see why the bulls pedal all this rubbish.

It's quite clear now from this thread, they are simply in it for the money and working out 250-800% increases. I've been wanting to see this actually in black and white on a thread for a while, and here it is, all working out how much profit they can make.

Yet they turn round and call people who just want a home, greedy for wanting sensible prices.

JonnyBravo

Graham_Devon wrote: »

You can kind of see why the bulls pedal all this rubbish.

It's quite clear now from this thread, they are simply in it for the money and working out 250-800% increases. I've been wanting to see this actually in black and white on a thread for a while, and here it is, all working out how much profit they can make.

Yet they turn round and call people who just want a home, greedy for wanting sensible prices.

You can see why Graham pedals this kind of rubbish.

It's quite clear now from his post that he simply wants to wind up as many as 250-800 bulls per post. I've been wanting to see this actually in black and white on a thread for a while, and here it is, working out how much rubbish he can talk in one post.

Yet he can turn round and call people who just want to wind up the bears, greedy for keeping all the fun to themselves.


Or something like that.

:rolleyes:

Graham_Devon

ad9898 wrote: »

So what we see here is the average male wage increasing by just over 30%, yet in the same time period average house prices went from approx 88k to 178k in the same time period, this is clearly and has proved to be unsustainable.

Which just has not happened. I.e. the wages.

The median that is being used is pulled up by the massive wages including bonuses company execs have paid themselves in the boom.

I don't really agree with Polly Toynbee, but she was on Question Time last night talking about this ,and in the last 10 years, exec pay has gone from 15x the average pay in the company to 75x the average pay in the company.

That is why the mean does not work. It will be pulled up by the likes of Fred the Shred. Footballers ever increasing wages will all pull it up.

It makes no sense to use it, other than it suits some, but its not realistic.

Median wages will not be pulled up by footballers and people gambling on hedge funds.

IveSeenTheLight

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Which just has not happened. I.e. the wages.

The median that is being used is pulled up by the massive wages including bonuses company execs have paid themselves in the boom.

I don't really agree with Polly Toynbee, but she was on Question Time last night talking about this ,and in the last 10 years, exec pay has gone from 15x the average pay in the company to 75x the average pay in the company.

That is why the mean does not work. It will be pulled up by the likes of Fred the Shred. Footballers ever increasing wages will all pull it up.

It makes no sense to use it, other than it suits some, but its not realistic.

Median wages will not be pulled up by footballers and people gambling on hedge funds.

Go ask the LR to start using median house prices then :rolleyes:
No point in Footballer millionaire mansions skewing the house price figures

Graham_Devon

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Go ask the LR to start using median house prices then :rolleyes:
No point in Footballer millionaire mansions skewing the house price figures

Again, there is a difference.

This is getting a little silly now, but anyway.

A footballers mansion may get sold once every so often. Lets just take 2-5 years as an example.

Whereas they get their salary year after year.

So the mansion may skew the figures once, in a five year period. But it skews the wages one year after year.

If you see what I mean. You probably don't, as I'm probably the only one who knows what I mean!

But these mansions etc are not sold evey year, whereas the wage is given every year. Which brings the median on the house prices down a little, as by far, the houses selling the most and most often are 2-3 beds.

That's why you have specialist sites like countrylife lsiting stately homes and mansions, because they are just that, one off's.

IveSeenTheLight

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Again, there is a difference.

This is getting a little silly now, but anyway.

A footballers mansion may get sold once every so often. Lets just take 2-5 years as an example.

Whereas they get their salary year after year.

So the mansion may skew the figures once, in a five year period. But it skews the wages one year after year.

If you see what I mean. You probably don't, as I'm probably the only one who knows what I mean!

But these mansions etc are not sold evey year, whereas the wage is given every year. Which brings the median on the house prices down a little, as by far, the houses selling the most and most often are 2-3 beds.

That's why you have specialist sites like countrylife lsiting stately homes and mansions, because they are just that, one off's.

I'm sorry, but the LR does not calculate in that way.
Again, you should try to verify the things you are trying to portray as facts

from http://www.landregistry.gov.uk/

How is the HPI calculated?

The HPI is a repeat sales regression (RSR) index, measuring average price changes in repeat sales on the same properties, ensuring a like for like comparison. This means that price changes on a flat in Mayfair are not compared to those on a flat in the Old Kent Road.
The statistical computation of the HPI is performed by Calnea Analytics Limited. Full details of methodology, a discussion of technical questions and a comparison with other index creation methods can be found by visiting www.calnea.com.

nembot

I wouldn't be at all suprised if the average price dropped to 110k or less, over the next five years. If things carry on as they are, we maybe there in three or four. The recent reports of rises go in one ear and out the other, certainly don't believe a word of it. Not saying I'm any kind of expert on the matter, but I've spent quite a few years reading the various house price related sites and others such as thisismoney.co.uk, which maybe why I'm probably more bearish than most.

I do however understand the fundamentals and the catalysts for the most recent crashes during the 70's and late 80's/early 90's. Admittedly this time things are different, as greed has enforced such a degree of unstainability that the only way the economy can function is for prices to drop realistically. This doesn't mean 3½x necessarily as times have changed somewhat, but I do mean a relative price for the property in question, not some ridiculous overpriced figure as we've seen over the last three years.

When you take into account that the recent job losses haven't had time for the knock on effect to take place, which will just exacerbate the situation proportionally. Even people in my place of work are being laid off and there aren't many jobs around at all is what I'm hearing compared to just twelve months ago.

Things are looking pretty grim

Generali

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Again, there is a difference.

This is getting a little silly now, but anyway.

A footballers mansion may get sold once every so often. Lets just take 2-5 years as an example.

Whereas they get their salary year after year.

So the mansion may skew the figures once, in a five year period. But it skews the wages one year after year.

If you see what I mean. You probably don't, as I'm probably the only one who knows what I mean!

But these mansions etc are not sold evey year, whereas the wage is given every year. Which brings the median on the house prices down a little, as by far, the houses selling the most and most often are 2-3 beds.

That's why you have specialist sites like countrylife lsiting stately homes and mansions, because they are just that, one off's.

That's a pretty dubious argument TBH. Just as loads of people earn less than a hundred thousand quid a year and a few earn more than that, loads of houses each year sell for less than half a million quid and a few for more.

IMO there aren't enough Fred the Shreds to significantly pull up the mean due to the much larger numbers of Fred the Bank Clerks, Fred the Bin Men and Fred the Minicab drivers.

It's easy to see if the mean is being shifted by these people. Compare the mean and the median. I guess they'll be similar. Mean wages are probably lower than median.

besonders1

I think the prices will return to what figure they were before the property boom. I guess around the year 2000 would be about acceptable. Over the last couple of months thee has been a lot of surprise about the market recovering but sadly thats just a false alarm as many "sold" houses are just bouncing back for sale again probably when the survey comes through. The only houses which are selling are ones bough by landlords who don't need banks. My advice is if you bought at the peak of the market, try to forget how much you paid.